RH Reality Check » public funding abortionhttp://rhrealitycheck.org
News, commentary and analysis for reproductive and sexual health and justice.Tue, 31 Mar 2015 21:24:03 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1“No on Anti-Choice Amendment 6:” The Right Move for Floridahttp://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/10/19/no-on-amendment-6-is-right-move-florida/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=no-on-amendment-6-is-right-move-florida
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/10/19/no-on-amendment-6-is-right-move-florida/#commentsFri, 19 Oct 2012 22:26:53 +0000Amendment 6 is an attack on reproductive rights. It would change the Florida Constitution to outlaw public funding for abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or where the life of the mother is affected.

As a young woman of Color residing in Florida, I’m very interested in and affected by the anti-choice antics in Tallahassee. When I heard about Amendment 6, I just had to tell the world about the next attack on reproductive rights. This attempt directly affects me as a young Black woman. I’m constantly facing stereotypes and attacks on my rights, and this I will not accept. I will not allow politicians to infringe upon my rights, and I will do everything in my power to keep politicians out of my doctor’s office!

Amendment measure 6 would change the Florida Constitution to outlaw public funding for abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is directly affected. In essence, this amendment would bring politicians out of Tallahassee and into your vagina. This amendment would stop those who pay for their own insurance and who are covered from receiving this vital medical procedure. Also, the murky wording of the bill leaves a lot of room for interpretation. This amendment wouldn’t even allow a woman who is pregnant with any debilitating disease, like cancer, for instance, to be treated, even though cancer is directly affecting the life of this woman.

I think most people, above all else, would like to keep politics out of our homes and out of our doctors’ offices. This amendment would completely strip women in Florida of privacy. It’s also a clear attack on those in lower socioeconomic classes. Those individuals would be greatly hindered from receiving the treatment they need from their insurance if this amendment passed.

To gain an even better understanding of Amendment 6, I spoke to Lisa Murano, deputy campaign manager and field director of the No on 6 initiatives in Orlando. She emphasized that, “We need to be reminded that people (mostly older men) are attacking our rights and autonomy constantly from many angles. I have found myself working in the political realm to right the legislative attacks.”

I also inquired about why Murano entered this policy work in the first place, and here is what she had to say, “I am involved in the women’s-rights movement because as a young woman, I feel that we need to stop taking our rights for granted and work to protect ourselves. We have seen attacks on women’s rights for years, but in the past two years, those attacks have been ramped up to levels we have never seen before.”

This bill is just one of the many attacks on women’s rights, and if we don’t put up a united front and stop this, rights that we believe are commonplace and essential may begin to be challenged. What are our opponents going to attack next? What is this world coming to where we can’t even keep politicians out of our vaginas?

As a young woman, I am directly targeted by this this bill, as are my friends and other young women like me who are under their parents’ insurance and can’t afford procedures fully out of pocket. What supporters of Amendment 6 also don’t seem to recognize is that when you take away necessary resources, women and families can become desperate and may seek unconventional and unsafe ways to go about getting the care they need. If what’s best for women is really the main priority for those people that support Amendment 6, how will this help women? You take away their resources, their privacy, and in essence put their backs against the wall.

This is not just a women’s issue, this is a family issue, and a direct attack on the families of Florida. If you believe that any medical decision should be left to a woman and her family and not politicians, VOTE NO ON 6, because that’s what it really comes down to.

]]>Across the state of Texas, public officials are watching the 82nd Legislature to find out when they’ll be forced to slash their budgets, and by how much, to accommodate a state financial shortfall that may be as much as $27 billion. Or, if we’re lucky, as little as $15 billion. Right now, the deficit is so huge and the books so complicated, nobody really knows what the final number will be.

In Dallas, where I live, the superintendent of schools recently told the Dallas Observer he may have to cut $260 million in funds for the education of area schoolchildren. He’s just got to wait and see what happens in the “lege.”

Meanwhile, down in Austin, the “lege” is dealing with an emergency. But it’s not a budget emergency. It’s not even a financial emergency at all. According to Governor Rick Perry, it’s an emergency that women in Texas are not asked to listen to a fetal heartbeat and have an abortion provider conduct a sonogram that they’ll describe to women in detail two hours before any abortion procedure.

Speaking before an anti-choice rally group at the Texas capitol on the 38th anniversary of Roe V. Wade, Perry told protestors:

“We can’t afford to give up the good fight until the day Roe v. Wade is nothing but a shameful footnote in our nation’s history books.”

Anti-choice legislators, led by influential Republican senator Dan Patrick whose Harris County District 7 is one of the wealthiest in the state, have jumped at this chance to push a bevy of abortion-related legislation in Texas this session, with multiple bills calling for pre-procedure sonograms, more calling to eliminate public funding for abortion and also demands to eliminate all public funding to anyone affiliated with abortion providers themselves. Other bills support Texans’ right to buy controversial “Choose Life” license plates, like these available in New Jersey.

But it’s the emergency thing that gets pro-choice activists here. Gov. Perry’s “emergency” designation permits the bills to be heard in the first 60 days of the session—they can’t be heard so early without it. How can medically unnecessary sonograms be an emergency in the face of a multi-billion budget shortfall and economic crisis?

The sonogram legislation is currently in committee and hasn’t been heard on the legislature floor yet. But Gov. Perry’s “emergency” decree has ensured a woman’s right to choose will be addressed well before anyone gets around to that pesky budget thing. Cleveland said she sees the sonogram bills as “paternalistic and unfair,” considering women opt for abortions only “after much careful soul-searching and thought.”

For legislation that claims to be about “informed consent,” the sonogram bills tell women nothing they don’t already know. Said Cleveland:

“We’ve yet to find a woman who believes that if she’s going in for an abortion, that she’s not going to emerge un-pregnant.”

At Planned Parenthood of North Texas, director of public affairs Kelly Hart said the sonogram legislation is about “shaming women” and infringing upon a doctor’s ability to say, “this is what a woman needs to get ethical, quality medical care.”

It’s worth noting that none of the sonogram bills include exceptions for victims of rape or incest, which means women who are pregnant as a result of these crimes will be forced to comply with the laws if they pass. It’s little more than saying, “Let’s just kick a woman while she’s down,” said Hart.

Abortion rights activists hope to see some conservative in-fighting in the legislature since there are multiple versions of these bills floating around at present. Once a single bill is solidified, they say they’ll know how to fight it.

“When anti-choicers get their political ducks in a row,” said Sara Cleveland, “we’ll know better how to respond.”

In the meantime, the state’s economic and budget crisis will continue to take a back-burner to punishing women who seek abortions. And that, says Hart, is a “slap in the face to the families in Texas who are un- or under-employed” who would benefit from “emergency” legislation that helps them—and public entities like, say, school districts–stay afloat financially.